City Council Meeting   6/6/2016

I'm

Music Playing

and Michael

Dr. Michael Kochis

Music playing...

OK. What a big, beautiful crowd.

I'd like to officially open this meeting in Charlottesville City Council.

We'll begin with a Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands,

I'd like to begin with a moment of silence for the great Muhammad Ali, who was a Charlottesville area resident and a great fighter.

So if we could just take a moment.

Thank you.

Mr. Bellamy?

Present.

Here.

Ms. Galvin?

Here.

We're just trying to increase the dramatic lighting.

All right, we begin our meetings with awards and recognitions and announcements.

So let's begin with awards and recognitions.

And we have Alzheimer's and Brain Awareness Month.

Mr. Bellamy.

It is my pleasure to read this.

So the city of Charlottesville would like to proclaim

the month of June, Alzheimer's Awareness Month.

Whereas Alzheimer's disease is an irreversible and progressive brain disease that slowly erodes precious memories, thinking skills, and the ability to perform simple tasks, and whereas worldwide, nearly 44 million people

have Alzheimer's or related dementia and Alzheimer's is the sixth leading cause of death in the United States and whereas nearly two-thirds of those with Alzheimer's disease are women and whereas the Alzheimer's Association is the world's leading voluntary health organization in Alzheimer's care, support and research with the vision of a world without Alzheimer's disease and whereas the longer day

On June 20th is a sunrise to sunset event symbolizing the challenging journey of those living with the disease and their caregivers offering everyone the opportunity to get involved in the fight and whereas the city of Charlottesville offers its support to those living with Alzheimer's disease, recognizes those who care and provide for them, honor their compassion, remember those who we have lost,

and press toward the next great scientific breakthrough.

Now, therefore, our illustrious Mayor Mike Signer and the rest of City Council hereby proclaim June as Alzheimer's Awareness Month in the City of Charlottesville, Virginia and call upon its citizens to learn more about Alzheimer's disease and support those living with this disease and their caregivers by stopping, excuse me, by supporting the longest day

which is an event on June 20th, 2016 and that was signed by our wonderful mayor Mr. Mike Signer.

Before we call those lovely ladies from Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Incorporated to come up, we want everyone to also know that there will be a

Deep Roots holds strong branches providing care for Alzheimer's caregivers.

And this is free to the public with lunch provided, all sponsored by the Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority Incorporated, Monday, June 20th, from 1130 to 1 p.m. in the PVCC room at the Jefferson School, 233 Street, 4th Street Northwest in Charlottesville, Virginia.

So is there anyone who'd like to come up and receive this proclamation?

It's impossible to swing the camera back there.

Can we get a ski?

Can we get a ski?

I also have an award.

Do you have one as well?

I have a proclamation.

I'd like to invite Krista Farrell, Terry DiCentio, and Chef Roberta.

Please come forward to accept this proclamation from the City of Charlottesville.

and a gift, a Jefferson Cup, to Chef Roberta as a token of our friendship, an appropriate gift, given the relationship between Thomas Jefferson and Filippo Mazzei.

And here is the proclamation honoring Chef Vivetta Roberta Centelli.

Whereas the City of Charlottesville, Charlottesville City Council, and the Sister City Commission are pleased to welcome Vivetta Roberta Centelli, chef and owner of Ristorante il Falcone in our sister city, Poggio Acciano, Italy, to Charlottesville.

And whereas Chef, Chef Centelli will share her many years of culinary skill and restaurant experience with our local restaurant community,

that I, Michael Signer, mayor of the city of Charlottesville, do hereby welcome Chef Ivetta Roberta Cintelli to Charlottesville and look forward to all we have to learn from her vast culinary knowledge.

And we do it, this is a very special Charlottesville tribute.

This is a Jefferson cup which represents the same metal cups of valuable metal that Thomas Jefferson used here.

And I will add that I hope you will please convey our greetings to your mayor who I have met.

And Mr. Signer, if I may, I'd like to just say one follow up to this nice exchange.

And it's such a joy to have Chef Roberta here.

I am also going to be going to Italy next week to present a paper on the strategic investment area.

The SIA is part of the 53rd International Making Cities Livable Conference.

The theme of this year's conference is Caring for our Common Home, Sustainable, Healthy, Just Cities and Settlements.

Documents that have inspired this call to address equity and sustainability issues together are the United Nations' goals to combat climate change, Pope Francis' encyclical Laudato Si, and the Islamic Climate Change Declaration.

But after I present my paper, I will then be heading to Poggio, Ochano, to visit our sister city, and hopefully have a meal in Il Falcone.

And this is just for public record and public information.

It's important to note that I will not be receiving any city money

to attend this conference or to visit Poggio.

I will be personally covering everything from meals, lodging, and transportation.

My compensation will be the honor of representing the work of our wonderful city on an international stage and sharing whatever feedback I receive, the city council staff, and the public upon my return, especially my dinner at Il Falcone.

Yeah, I'm going to use the light, I'm telling everybody again, the light is burnt out above us, but we're going to use the light of our shared purpose here today to

something.

So the Daughters of Zion held a rededication ceremony on May 29th at the Daughters of Zion Cemetery located at Oak and First Streets South and I attended and I read this proclamation which we'll share with the public tonight as well.

Whereas in 1873

An African-American women's benevolent group known as the Daughters of Zion purchased approximately two acres in Charlottesville, Virginia for use as a cemetery and whereas the Daughters of Zion Cemetery which serves as burial ground for approximately 300 known and

and unknown African American citizens was managed by the benevolent group until 1933 when the organization was dissolved.

And whereas the Daughters of Zion Cemetery is listed on both the state and national registers of historic places, and whereas the Daughters of Zion Cemetery can help tell the full story of race in Charlottesville and therefore change our city's narrative,

Now, therefore, be it resolved that the city of Charlottesville, which assumed ownership of the cemetery in 1971, officially recognizes the Daughters of Zion Cemetery as one of its treasured landmarks, signed and sealed the 16th day of May, 2016.

And we have two of the organizers of this great effort with us here today to receive this proclamation.

We want to thank the city of Charlottesville for their support of this historic effort and we look forward to collaborating to see the reality of this project actually actually taking place and being accomplished.

So I have an award, is it timed?

OK.

So our own Charlottesville area transit, CAT, received an award at the Virginia Transit Association, the 2016 Small System Outstanding Public Transportation Marketing Award.

The award, which was presented during VTA's annual conference, recognizes CAT for its 2015 City as a Canvas campaign.

Charlottesville's area transit manager, John Jones, who is behind you,

and Marketing Coordinator Wesley Kern, who is not back there, accepted the 2016 Small System Outstanding Public Transportation Marketing Award.

The campaign spotlighted the importance of art in the local community while using unconventional methods to promote transit and creativity.

The initiative, which was a collaboration between CAT and the TomTom Founders Festival, used a combination of bus shelters and soon to be retired transit bus to display original works completed by local artists and authors.

The graffiti bus provided over 28,000 passenger trips during the two month campaign.

CAT experienced an 8% increase in ridership as a whole and a 21% increase in ridership on the line that sported the painted bus.

CAT was one of only three systems recognized at the annual conference.

So I don't believe that we have the actual award here.

Have you already gotten that?

I assume.

OK, so you have it.

But would you like to come up and say anything about it?

Mr. Jones, thank you.

He's shaking his head no, but he's got it.

I would like to acknowledge all the hard work that Wesley put into that campaign working with the TomTom Founders Festival and putting that together and getting with the artists and making space available.

We started to paint the bus and it began to rain, so we actually ended up finishing it up in our wash bay out on Avon.

As he stated in his press release, it was very well received, so much so that we did it again this year, but we didn't paint the bus this year.

We wrapped that one.

If you've seen the

The one running around that, the one that we painted was an old bus that we were taking out of service.

All right, other announcements, my colleagues?

I have a real short one, Mike, but don't you have something you want to lead off with your announcement?

No.

Okay.

Renew boards and commissions after.

Yes, after me.

Okay.

Krista Farrell, I've seen Krista.

Okay, would you come forward and tell us about the JMRL, Jefferson Madison Regional Library.

I'd be happy to.

Thank you for having me.

All of you have in your packets tonight the hot off the press Beyond the Books brochure, and this is the schedule of all the summer programs at the Jefferson Madison Regional Library.

We just had our summer reading kickoff party on Saturday.

Tonight there's one at Gordon Avenue, there's one at Crozet this week, there's one at Northside.

So we want to encourage everyone in the community, yourselves included,

to participate in the Summer Reading Program and there are prizes and it's for all ages.

It's not just for little kids anymore.

It runs from June 1st through August 31st and then there are weekly special programs for the small children and prizes include winning books for reading and the challenges are pretty easy.

So I hope you all will participate and if anybody in the community hasn't gotten one already you can come to any library location and pick up the Beyond the Books.

Thank you.

I have another one for a save the date for Juneteenth.

Juneteenth will be taking place officially starting off at June 17th at the Jefferson School African American Heritage Center and the Jefferson School City Center.

So this is an observance and it begins again on Friday, June 17th at 6 p.m.

at the Daughters of Zion Cemetery where a libation ceremony will be performed to honor our ancestors.

Participants will return to the Jefferson School African American Heritage Center for a presentation about the school's history by Dr. Andrea Douglas.

On Saturday the 18th, there's going to be a celebration

and they'll continue the performances with choirs, musicians, orators, poets, rappers.

It's going to have salsa, cake walks, square dance, hand jive, you name it, it's going to be going down.

And meanwhile the children will participate in a scavenger hunt or learn to build a West African dwelling.

And you can also, you will also be able to partake in our African American vendors market.

Vendors pick up your vendor application at the African American Heritage Center.

And again, this is all June 17th through the 19th.

The celebration will conclude with the Jazz Dinner featuring Mr. Jamal Milner and Ms. Clarice Coles Harris.

And that's $15 Friday and Saturday night of next week.

Other announcements?

Okay, we're going to announce

We have two appointments tonight.

You want to do that first?

Well, we're talking about the Blue Ribbon Commission first.

So we met in closed session tonight before this meeting and discussed the Blue Ribbon Commission for race, memorials, and public spaces.

So I'm going to announce the

The slate that we have chosen for this commission.

It is Gordon Fields as the representative of the Human Rights Commission.

We had three committees that were represented.

Rachel Lloyd from the Place Commission, Margaret O'Brien from the Historic Resources Committee, Frank Dukes, John Mason, Jane Smith, Don Gathers, Andrea Douglas and Melvin Burrus.

So we're excited for this commission to get to work.

The city manager has developed a robust slate of meetings that it will be undertaking.

Mr. Fenwick?

I would like to place a nomination.

Jennifer Mayo.

Let me make sure I have that.

I thought I saw somewhere on here was bears.

Jennifer here tonight perhaps?

Okay, is it Mayo or Mayor?

Mayo.

Okay, I'm sorry.

Jennifer Mayo as member of the Board of Directors of CACVB.

I would say what those initials stand for, but I'd get one of the initials wrong, I know.

There you go.

Thanks, Kurt.

Takes a village.

Any discussion?

All in favor?

OK. That nomination carries 5 to 0.

Congratulations, Ms. Mayo.

Okay, we now are going to do the city manager response to matters of the public from our last meeting.

Mr. Jones is unavailable to be with us tonight because he's at this conference in Virginia Beach for local government officials.

Council, I have a follow up on five items from last meeting.

The first was some discussion about pedestrian safety and safety in general at the McIntire-Harris intersections.

And we did have staff analyze all accidents there.

The most recent pedestrian accident, which is in the press, is the only one of the last two and a half years that we have record.

We do have in 2014 we recorded six vehicle accidents in 2015-12 and there are five this year to date.

Mr. Bellamy requested at the last meeting that we work on a work session jointly between council

and the Charlottesville Redevelopment Housing Authority.

There are two dates that are being proposed right now.

They are at the time that precedes the Housing Authority's board meetings in July and August, either July 25th or August 22nd.

with some preference by the authority for the August date since they have a brand new executive director as of May 23rd, Mr. Grant Duffield.

That needs to get confirmed by you all on your calendars with Miss Rice sometime.

The next item was a comment, I believe, from Nancy Carpenter with regard to some safety issues for pedestrians crossing between Forrest and Preston.

We have a new traffic engineer, Dr. Rashad Hanbali,

who is looking at that intersection along with Rose Hill and some others that have been identified in your recent Our Town meeting and I expect a report sometime in the next couple weeks on that area.

There's been some discussion and a lot of email from various citizens about speeding throughout the city.

As you're aware, we're fortunate to welcome a new police chief on May 23rd, Chief Al Thomas.

and the city manager has talked with the chief and myself about convening a group across departments to look at speeding issues not only in enforcement but in our city policies and we will be bringing something back to council once we've convened that group and have some recommendations.

The final is a question that has come to you all a couple times about bus service on Grady.

I happen to have Mr. Jones from CAT here, and we'll see if I get this exactly right.

I want to make you all aware that throughout the time that the university is in session,

We do have Monday through Saturday service in the Grady Avenue corridor.

When they are out of session, if we were to simply institute something that would fill in that time frame while they take down the UTS service, it would cost approximately $126,000 to replicate that.

If council wanted a Grady route that would be full service Monday through Saturday, we estimate that would be about $385,000.

and if you want that to happen on Sunday also another 36,000.

Those are the items from follow-up.

I'm happy to bring that back to you in any way you like and send you that electronically also.

We now move on to matters by the public.

We have a system where folks sign up for

ahead of time by email or phone and we have 11 on the list tonight.

So we're beginning with Lena Seville.

And let me just read the guidelines first.

Sorry, the guidelines for public comment.

We welcome public comment.

It's an important part of our meeting.

Time is reserved near the beginning and at the end of each regular city council meeting for matters by the public.

Please follow these guidelines.

If you're here to speak for a public hearing, please wait to speak on the matter until the report for that item has been presented and the public hearing has been opened.

Each speaker has three minutes to speak.

Please give your name and address before beginning your remarks.

Please do not interrupt speakers whether or not you

Agree with them.

Please refrain from using obscenities.

If you cannot follow these guidelines, you'll be escorted from city council chambers and not permitted to re-enter.

And then this is our device.

So green is when you have plenty of time, yellow is when you're in close, and red is when you have a few seconds till your time is up.

So please respect that.

Good evening.

My name is Lena Seville.

I live at 808 Alta Vista Avenue in the city of Charlottesville.

I'm here to talk to you about one topic, but in two different aspects of it.

So there's a light on Water Street at Third Street Southeast.

It goes along Water Street, but the cross street on one side is the parking garage, so it's

a building on one side and a dead end to the downtown mall on the other side.

So it's not a through street.

It's a rarely used half street at most.

And it's next to a bus stop.

So the buses get held up by that light frequently as they're leaving the downtown transit center.

So we've asked to have that light removed through the CAT advisory board.

because it interferes with the buses stopping and going.

It adds a few minutes to each route, and it basically doesn't really serve much purpose.

It stays 30 seconds on each direction.

So it's 30 seconds on Water Street, Green, and then 30 seconds on a dead-end street, Green.

It doesn't make a lot of sense.

So there was a process.

There was a hearing, and I believe it was January.

and we were told that it was going to be removed when NDS could restripe it, that sort of thing.

Since then I've heard from multiple sources that there's a problem with removing it.

And that's actually what I came here to talk with you about.

The light itself is an issue, but also the process.

I'm hoping that what I heard was a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of what happened, but I've heard, again, from multiple sources that

that a city councilor spoke with somebody internally, the city manager's office perhaps, that they did not want it removed or there was some reason why they didn't want it removed.

And then it got back to me that apparently it's not scheduled for removal now.

This is a problem because there's a process in place for dealing with these kinds of things and city councilors are elected to deal with things on the process level and not to ask for special treatment for friends or donors.

So we want to follow the existing process.

We want to make sure it's fair.

We don't want anybody getting special treatment separate from

The way things are set up and so this would be if what I heard was accurate This would be in my opinion a problem that a counselor intervened on this level and that the city manager's office then Sort of agreed with it in my opinion.

That would be a slippery slope Towards corruption and an abuse of power.

Good evening, mayor and city council.

My name's Michelle Packer.

My family and I live at the intersection of Spotswood and Meadowbrook Road.

Subject property is here.

And we enjoy living in the city.

However, it deeply concern or is deeply concerning to me and my family and very discouraging when we do our best to make the city of Charlottesville habitable for all of us

and the city staff are driving a recommendation that will have unintended consequences on our beloved community.

What they are proposing is for you to approve a SUP requested by Aqua, Virginia to install a car wash on subject property.

And I have a map here that outlines where that property would be located.

and if you look at the map, the piece of property behind the subject property is actually owned by the city of Charlottesville.

That land was acquired by the city in 1960.

That was land that, from my research, seems to be a road that was originally proposed before Morton Drive.

The city abandoned that project when Morton Drive was constructed.

As a result of today, that's what brings us here.

So I want to talk with you a little bit about that decision in the 60s and also to talk about why we need to look no further than previous city recommendations where in the 60s, in the spirit of urban renewal, we decimated another beloved city neighborhood.

And I want to prevent that from happening to our neighborhood, the Meadowbrook Hills.

I believe city neighborhoods have a DNA.

That includes places where networks of individuals and families live.

Traffic is tame.

People value, people feel value by their city leaders.

Businesses bring interest and usefulness to the surrounding community.

And pedestrian, not vehicular traffic, is encouraged.

Community leaders like the late Jane Jacobs describe the anatomy of a city not as a car wash, but a local market, a store, in her words, a pub.

Why?

Because these spaces are walkable.

They bring people in the neighborhood and the city together.

So what are my family and I's major concerns?

One, the traffic impact.

and I provide you with a copy of VDOT's 2011 traffic counts.

I've attended some of the community meetings for this proposed project and basically what we've learned is that the...

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'm Deena Imwe and I'm the president of the Meadowbrook Hills Rugby Neighborhood.

Michelle Packer is one of my neighbors and she is about to say that we have a car wash that's being proposed to go where the old Pizza Hut and Subway are located

on Emmett Street.

The issue is that the car wash originally was scheduled to allow an entrance only into the property and exit onto Meadowbrook.

That has been changed, so there will be a possibility for traffic from the business to enter and exit, enter from Emmett and exit

on to Emmett, but the configuration is still going to allow customers to go from the car wash, through the car wash, and out onto our R1 zoned residential street.

And we are concerned that this is setting a precedent for all the what we call hamburger row businesses along Emmett between Barracks and Morton.

and it's entirely possible that other businesses would like to take advantage of the fact that they can cross the creek into our neighborhood.

One such business is going to come up before you for in Capshaw's development at the corner of Barracks and Emmett and that's also being suggested to have an exit and entrance on Meadowbrook.

So we are not a commercial corridor.

We're a residential street and we don't want

to have happen to our neighborhood what seems to be happening around the city and that is that neighborhoods, R1 neighborhoods are under assault.

There is an effort to down zone, to put PUDs and various planning obstacles in place so that residences can no longer be the pedestrian bicycle friendly neighborhoods that

we used to have.

We're not against progress, we're not against commercial development, we just feel that they have an appropriate place and it's not into and out of our neighborhood.

And that's it.

Thank you.

Louis Schultz?

Excuse me.

If you don't want to, that's fine.

I don't mean to be difficult, but I'm tired of having men

speak to us and treat us as if they are our rulers and not our servants.

I reject them because of that.

I'm a free man standing in my own country, and they are supposed to serve us, and in fact, they do not.

I've come here today with a bit of dynamite, we afraid.

When I was standing in the back earlier, I was watching the beginning of this meeting, and there's much glad-handing and smiles and gentleness and all of the elements and conduct of a more refined civilization.

That's a very good thing.

and there's great strength there but unfortunately there's also a great weakness.

We are in fact exactly like the peoples of Europe who have after several years inviting successive waves of Muslim migrants into their communities are now finding that their women are being raped and attacked, that their towns are being pillaged by these Muslim liars.

That is not to say that all the Muslims coming to Europe or America are bad people.

That is not the case.

Many of them most certainly are and they do not belong in our country.

There is no methodology for vetting these people.

I'm going to cite our rules, which is that you do need to address counsel.

That is a rule for matters by the public.

So you do need to address us.

We don't have speech making here.

This is matters to the public to counsel.

I see Mike.

No.

I'm just asking you to do what matters to the public or forth.

Let me ask you something.

Did you actually hear a damn thing that we say, Mike?

I sat in your office for 10 minutes and you barely contained your contempt for me when I tried to address this very issue.

This is appropriate.

You're welcome to have the police officer escort me out of here.

You have no authority over me.

You have violated the authority that we the people have given you because you don't treat us as the people whom you serve.

Now Mike, he offered, you should take him up on his offer.

Yeah, you've wasted my time.

You've burned my time up.

Thank you.

This young woman, 19 minute video taken by the citizens of New York.

Can you allow the next speaker to speak?

Rebecca Quinn, 1044 Street here in the city.

I'm a proponent of transparency and ensuring citizens of Charlottesville know what's going on in city government.

To my point today though, I want them to know what government is doing to them.

On the one hand, I appreciate future utility bills will include a notice of payment in lieu of taxes called pilot.

On the other hand, it seems to me there's some obfuscation or at a minimum sort of government ease

that I fear might not clear up much.

The staff memo says the pilot is an expense of each utility.

In my book, an expense is something you pay for, something you buy.

How can a tax, which is collected revenue, be an expense?

Okay, I get that each utility pays it to the general fund, so the utility books call it an expense, but that doesn't make it a legitimate expense.

Next, the staff memo says the pilot portion is transferred to the general fund and I quote, as this is the fund to which liabilities are owed.

By definition, a liability is indeed something owed.

If I take out a loan, then the amount owed is my liability and I have a legal responsibility to pay it.

But it doesn't make sense in this case.

What do the civil utilities owe to the general fund?

That money is given to the general fund, not owed.

I still don't buy the argument that just because it's legal that we should charge this tax.

I think it's not right, especially the pilot assessed on natural gas.

The memo says 87% of properties are built for water, wastewater, and natural gas.

I think the staff report about expenses and liabilities is a way to kind of hide the fact that at least some of our gas users bear a disproportionate share of over $3 million a year that goes into the general fund

used for general expenses, all citizens, not just those taxpayers.

So I've heard city staff say they don't know which property owners or how many accounts use gas for heating.

I think it's pretty easy.

Take the bills for a cold month and look at the usage.

And I think you're going to fall into pretty naturally low users who are using it for cooking, high users use it for cooking and gas.

And I think it'd be really interesting to do a plot

on a map to see where are those high users.

I still think many of them are likely to be in older, less energy-efficient homes, often owned by our elderly or low-income homeowners, which means they really are overburdened by this tax.

One last thing.

I understand it's illegal for the city to tax the wastewater bill,

So why is it legal to charge a payment in lieu of taxes?

I don't know how much that generates, but that's the question.

And I think there are many other elements to this whole pilot issue that I would like to discuss in the coming year.

Thank you.

My name is Joan Fenton.

I live at 3705 Country Lane.

As many of you are aware, the downtown community recently held several meetings about parking downtown.

And in 15 years of being involved with activities downtown, I have never seen such a large group, such a diverse group, and such a united group come together with the same idea that they thought parking

was critical to downtown that they thought that the city has an important role to play in parking downtown, that we are all counting on you to be the provider, the subsidizer of a utility that is essential to downtown, that we all believe that if downtown doesn't thrive, everybody's hurt.

And money that's invested in parking downtown comes back

in greater taxes, greater service for downtown.

People moved to Charlottesville because they love coming downtown.

And as I say, I have never seen so many people come.

The first meeting, we had 45.

As word got out, the second meeting, we had 60.

And these are people who never come to downtown meetings.

And they were all of the same opinion.

There's a petition that's being circulated.

And because it was so late, it's not getting to you ahead of all the decisions that you're making.

but you're gonna get a whole influx of petitions coming in in support of the city being a partner in parking, of providing parking, and of looking at long-range need.

We received a letter that said maybe there isn't a need.

All those businesses, all those people, property owners, people that shop down here feel that the city has to be looking to the future and coming up with plans for parking so that we continue to thrive.

I am confident that this council will do the right thing.

I really believe you will do that.

I hope you'll do that.

And I really thank you for putting in the effort and the time to make this happen.

And I'd just like to add, just on a totally different note, on that parking light on Third Street, it is the handicapped access from the parking garage to get to the mall.

So when you come down that elevator, you cross Third Street.

And if you're going to do something, I think you can change the timing, but you should have some light there so that somebody in a wheelchair can get to the mall, which again is part of an overall parking usability plan for downtown.

Thank you.

Douglas Eddy.

Edward Brooks.

I live at 2630 Garden, Elaine and Esmont and I wanted to address the whole issue of Lee Park.

I have been watching from the sidelines.

I've been reading the articles in the newspaper.

I am a close relative of Drewy Brown and all that he did in this community.

I think that the bridge named after him is probably as fitting as it could be with what his life represented.

Also an aunt that just passed away last year, the 101, she was the first sales associate here in Charlottesville and worked through the Jim Crow era and all of that.

I think Charlottesville also is in a period where, you know, you're looking at the court square dynamics, a lot of things are going on with the hotel, the downtown mall is as vibrant as it's ever been, and this is a time to look at the statue in Lee Park in a bigger scheme of what can Charlottesville do for the future to tell its story within the context of tourism.

And I do think that Charlottesville, over the last hundred years, has represented itself as a progressive city.

Now it's not been without blemish, but it has.

And you look at these statues, all of these things, they mention that they were done with public appropriations throughout the whole South.

and they also were done with legalities.

All of them have federal, state, local laws that made it permissible to put up symbols that represented the lost cause of the Confederacy.

And that's why I think the system that you all have put in place with using the Blue Ribbon Commission, I also have a

I collect civil rights information.

You'll see what happened in Richmond in 1999 with all of putting Lee on the mural down there.

But practical, prudent, deliberate, all of that.

But the Civil Rights Act of 65 is what so many of the civil rights leaders fought for.

And they fought to elect people that would bring forward a progressive vision.

And there's no way to get around, particularly with putting $10,000 into this commission, that their voices are going to carry great weight.

And yet we look at the city now and what it has done and how progressive it has become.

They elected you and they want you to make that decision first.

And that's what the fight for voting and civil rights was all about.

A lot of people left the city that didn't like what was happening, the vision.

They comment on it.

But you're here.

You're the ones that have the ability to lead the situation.

and that's what we wanted to have happen.

Charlottesville has a great story to tell about progressiveness and that's why I think this park could be renamed Centennial Park, 1920 to 2020.

In four years we'll have 2020, perfect vision.

And I think that's a story that can be told all over the South and maybe Charlottesville is a place where it can start and where it can be done.

Thank you.

John Hayden.

I was at City Hall Friday in order to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's.

In other words, I was paying taxes.

When a woman tapped me on the shoulder and asked, aren't you the guy who goes to city council and gives them what for all the time?

I politely nodded yes.

She said, they don't listen to us.

As she turned, she said, keep giving them hell.

So here we are again.

I don't think you realize the level of discontent that the citizens of this town have for the contempt you show us with your attitude of do as I say, not as I do.

I think I've been respectful to you unless you're offended by being called liberal socialists.

I follow the rules with no outbursts, but that can always change since it seems like that around here the squeaky wheel gets the grease.

I'm getting concerned about the reports I see on city and county school overcrowding.

I was alarmed by a statistic published by the county that looked like the city had more than double the amount of crime of the county according to the newly released 2015 annual report released by the county on page 11.

Researching city crime data, the latest I could find was from 2013, and the link on the city website to the crime data was dead.

So I have to ask, with the overcrowding, the non-existent crime data, who are these people, where did they come from, and how much are the taxpayers having to pay for this overcrowding?

At first we were told we had a four and a half million dollar

Surplus, then a week later, a $4 million deficit.

Where did over $8 million disappear to, or were you using common core in your mathematics?

I'm concerned that you're bringing people in who basically have nothing, and we taxpayers are expected to fund their whole existence.

I realize you have this thing for diversity, but does the economic impact

Good evening, I'm John Hossack from 617 Davis Avenue.

As I always do on these occasions, thank you for your time and sacrifice for the community.

I'm here to talk about the relative priorities of hydraulic versus ROI in terms of intersection improvement.

My job doesn't allow me to spend the time that's necessary to look into this.

By looking over the matter, looking at Places 29 and other documents, I've come to the conclusion that City Council collectively and historically has had a policy move back to 1995 to either be against an improvement at hydraulic in terms of being a great separate interchange or insisting that rye will be done first.

I can't find any formal record of the reasoning, be it economic, political or resident driven.

Further, in the pre-Western Bypass cancellation documents, references to these intersections assume that the funding and building would occur in the 2020s or the 2030s, if ever.

the sentiment was towards extending the life of all these junctions so this refrain that the route 29 solutions is simply an execution on a bunch of existing plans isn't as affectionate because all of these three major projects the Rio, US widening and hydraulic intersections were labeled as long-term priorities and that is why they require design-build contracts and not build contracts

Anyhow, Rile Road is a good enough done deal and will be open in a few months so I'm here to ask again basically where is $100 million going to come for fixing hydraulic given that recently I-64 Junction 118 redo was ranked near the bottom of state priorities

I'm concerned that hydraulic will be taking many decades to completion basically but people like me are looking at either living in our street watching the number of cars go zipping up and down go up year after year until either we move out or we die so absent effects of hydraulic the traffic is going to come down streets like my own north of 250 and East of Park Street

Meanwhile I'd like to make everybody aware that 50 million dollars is being zipped through to basically make a two lane shortcut from Walmart to Target.

50 million dollars for a two lane road a fifth of a mile with a 35 million hour speed limit.

And how did we get here?

We had scarcely any discussion about this.

With a few more weeks of meaningful discussion two years ago, we might have avoided this mismatch of priorities and expenditure, but here we are and we now have to live with the consequences.

Thank you.

So on behalf of council, I want to thank everyone for taking time to come tonight and share your opinions with us.

I know a lot of thought and preparation goes into these remarks and we do appreciate matters by the public.

The city manager will be responding in two weeks to the matters that were raised tonight, as you heard tonight.

Anyone have anything they want to?

Okay.

I want to about the, we're about to move on to the,

There's one matter before the consent agenda.

On the consent agenda, I want to say that one item we're going to vote on, but Ms. Susan Elliott is going to speak about the city's climate protection program afterward for a few minutes.

There is one item before we get to the consent agenda, which is a resolution regarding Charlottesville Parking Center.

I'm going to read this resolution and then we will have any discussion and then a vote on it.

The resolution reads as follows.

Charlottesville Parking Center, CPC, has given the city of Charlottesville an appraisal that CPC represents as the fair market value of the parking spaces at the Water Street Garage.

In light of the public's interest in accessible and affordable parking, downtown City Council hereby directs the city manager to make an offer to buy CPC spaces based on the value of that appraisal.

The city manager is further authorized to create an advisory task force of stakeholders with the mission of providing advice and resources to the city on parking.

Is there any discussion about this resolution from my colleagues?

Any further discussion?

All in favor?

That motion carries five to zero.

Okay, consent agenda.

Ms. Rice, will you please read it?

Oh, and I should say one item has been, item G has been removed by the consent agenda.

Item A minutes from May 16th, item B in appropriation, victim witness assistance program grant increase $22,245 for situ readings.

Item C in appropriation, Virginia Homelessness Solutions Grant, $5,887, first of two readings.

Item D in appropriation, Local Agency Contributions for Crisis Intervention Training, $15,000, first of two readings.

Item E in appropriation, Albemarle County Reimbursement for the Gordon Avenue Ceiling and Lightning Replacement Project, $25,000, first of two readings.

Item F, Resolution Amendment to Local Government Support Agreement for Recycling Programs, first of one reading.

Item G has been removed.

Item H, a resolution, 2016 Climate Protection Program Support Grant, $70,000, first of one reading.

Item I, a resolution, approval of employment of outside counsel, first of one reading.

Item J, a resolution, notification of pilot for utilities, first of one reading.

Item K, an ordinance utility rate, second of two readings.

Item L, an ordinance homeowner tax relief grant, first of two readings.

Any questions on any items?

There a motion to approve?

So moved.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any further discussion?

All in favor of the consent agenda?

Consent agenda carries five to zero.

Hello.

Hello.

So I am the program coordinator for the city's Climate Protection Program.

And one of the items on the consent agenda was related to our program.

I was told I had maybe about five minutes to give you guys some background about our program and what our current activities are.

If you haven't picked up on it already, I speak very quickly, so we'll have some time for questions at the end and I'm happy to come back in the future or other ways to give you more information if you'd like.

I'd like to start off by talking a little bit about the background and history of what our program is.

In 2006, Charlottesville signed the U.S. Mayor's Client Protection Agreement, and at that point there was consensus that if Charlottesville was actually going to make any progress towards

meeting what we had agreed to in that.

We were going to need to put some staff programs and resources towards that.

In 2007, the city established the Climate Protection Program.

Starting in 2008, we did our first baseline greenhouse gas emissions report, following the idea that you can't track anything, you can't make progress on anything if you don't start to measure it.

That report included a baseline year inventory of 2,000 and inventory from 2006.

What it captures is any activity that happens within the city of Charlottesville, so both the community and our local organization, that has greenhouse gas related emissions associated with those activities.

Then in 2009, the city worked together with some other local groups to pursue a grant that established the Local Energy Alliance Program.

LEAP is Local Energy Alliance Program.

We have worked consistently with them as a partner ever since they were established.

At the time, there was recognition that having a non-government and non-private sector entity

that could work regionally in our area, leverage grant funds and utility funded programs to help serve our residents and our businesses.

And that could also be a trusted resource for the community and provide expertise on whole building energy improvements was considered value.

And so that was what the foundation was for why we pursued that grant to help set up LEAP.

Then in 2011, there was a regional local climate action planning process.

It was partaken in by the UVA.

County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville.

There was about a 15-member steering committee that represented a broad array of interests from Charlottesville, and the result of that process produced a five-part framework.

The framework, those five parts speak to the facets of the ways that energy plays a role in all of our lives, and it recommended strategies that each of the three different jurisdictions could go ahead and pursue improving the energy performance and reducing greenhouse gas emissions for other activities.

In 2012, we did an update to our greenhouse gas report.

That inventory included data from 2009, 2011.

2010 had a wacky year with weather, and so comparing that data to anything prior would have been a mis-comparison.

So that's why we chose 2011.

That 11 year retrospective confirmed one of the findings from the LCAP report that the vast majority of our emissions is related to energy use in our buildings.

It also emphasized that there was the largest increase, once you look beyond UVA's growth that they were going under at that time, was in the residential sector.

That over those 11 years, they saw a 13.5% increase in their energy use.

There is a small contribution from the municipal sector as in the city operations, which is less than 3%, but we also were in that report able to demonstrate great gains and achievable practical approaches and processes that we had implemented.

In 2011 alone, from energy saving measures we had taken in our city facilities, we avoided giving the utility companies over $840,000 just for that one year.

Since 2011, we have continued energy management programs within the city, and we have also begun to install solar PV on our rooftops to generate our own energy.

We currently have five systems up and running, and there is one more that is currently under installation right now.

So that kind of then jumps us forward to where we were.

The greenhouse gas report in 2012 and the LCAP report laid the foundation of what we were then going to look at going forward.

Charlottesville is part of an increasing number of communities that are being active on climate protection and sustainability both within Virginia and across the country.

Many of our successes here locally are the result of partnerships with local organizations and regional organizations.

Our pro-climate protection program focuses both internally on city operations and externally at what's going on in the community in supporting better energy decisions.

We work on small scale initiatives and engagement as well as we work on higher level programs and policy level topics.

We support a broad array of energy initiatives, which if you look over at the greenhouse gas report for anyone at home or if you have access to the internet, you can find those at Charlottesville.org slash emissions.

And if you specifically want to see the results of our 2012 report and a two-page infographic we put together around those findings, that's also at Charlottesville.org slash emissions.

If you want to see the LCAP five-part framework, that's Charlottesville.org slash LCAP.

So when you look at that profile, you'll see that it's more than just the buildings that we focus on, and so the broad array of initiatives that we deal with include alternative and clean energy transportation,

Waste reduction, sustainable waste management programs.

And then a large amount of our effort goes towards reflecting the large amount of energy that's used in our buildings by supporting improved energy performance, both in our residences, our businesses, our houses of faith, and our nonprofits.

Being consistent about what process works to help improve the energy performance and reduce energy use, and being consistent about making the right investments for the right building at the right time.

Over the last two years, we've been partaking and competing in the Georgetown University Energy Prize Competition.

The competition is based quantitatively and qualitatively.

There's a $5 million grand prize that will go to one community, has to go back to the community, and there are over 50 communities nationwide that are competing in this.

Recognizing the different limitations and opportunities across our community, we have a four-part framework for that to support people, whether they are adopting behaviors and actions in their homes, small do-it-yourself improvements, or larger investments to upgrade the building itself.

So there's the fly-by of everything since 2006 that we've been doing.

Thank you.

I'll just say one word.

We have divided the meetings with the new procedures into two types.

There's a working meeting, a business meeting, and a working meeting.

The first meeting of the month is a business meeting.

The second is a working meeting with work sessions.

One of the purposes of the business meeting is to provide information to the public and publicity about certain programs we're doing in a way they might not get with and in a way that's a little different from a big long report.

So we made the decision to pull this item off of the consent agenda to kind of let the public know more about climate work because the city is very progressive and is doing its

a ton of work on this and it's a very frustrating issue internationally.

It's one of the things that I think is important.

So we are working, you all are working very hard locally with support from past city councils and this one now with this grant.

So that was one of the reasons to take, you know, five or ten minutes and pull this off the agenda for the benefit of the public.

I'd just like to tease out one thing.

I'm looking at the map you have of 2014 or the end of 2014 and now

and I don't think anybody at home can probably see my iPad, but the dots are solar installations in the city and it's in the agenda as well.

but the LEAP program and the Solarize program actually helped to put in 42 new residential, I think mostly, solar projects.

But what's interesting is that we got 35 new private solar projects at the same time.

And speaking for myself, my house was one of the private ones, that I think there was so much buzz about LEAP doing Solarize that even people who didn't get in to Solarize

thought, you know, how would that work for me and how long would it take me to pay it off by saving in power bills?

And in our case, the economics worked and we went ahead and did solar panels.

So it's really exciting that we have about 100 solar powered buildings now in Charlottesville, whereas before we had 23, 18, 18, sorry, my math was poor.

I have one question.

Well, in terms of our outcomes, did we reduce greenhouse gas emissions?

Did something go down?

Right.

So our emissions overall actually did go up.

They went up overall.

What we did see, though, was that there's a couple of things around that.

UVA had made their decision that they were going to basically put a growth boundary, and they were going to fill in within that area.

And then they were going to cap that and try to live within that.

They went through a growth spurt during that period.

Over those 11 years, they increased their emissions by 28%.

And as a note for anyone who's technical on this, the land of UVA falls partly within the city and the county.

Back when we did our first admissions report, it was unknown if the county was going to pursue one or not.

And so since UVA is such a large player in the community, it was decided that we should count all of their land, even if it's technically in the county, in our report.

And so we've stayed true on those metrics to be able to compare from past to now.

Okay.

Okay, straight to LEAP.

Yeah, so in the council packet is what the program services agreement, or sorry, program support agreement has in it.

and every year when we've worked with them we've established that agreement.

That is the baseline for what we are expecting for that year and then we have meetings with them throughout the year to see if we're on track.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your time.

Okay, moving on to the next item on the agenda, Public Hearing Resolution Charlottesville Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau Lease Renewal.

Yes, Mayor Signer, Council Members, I'm John Jones, the City Transit Manager.

We have here before you tonight the new lease.

I see on the agenda that it's actually marked as a renewal.

This is actually a new lease.

It is revised with regard to the square footage and is also a consolidation of three leases into one for the Charlottesville Albemarle Convention and Visitors Bureau, CACVP.

There you go.

It covers the time between July 1st of 2016 and June 30th of 2019 with a couple of renewal options available at that time.

You have also in the packet that explains the lease where the space is in the downtown transit center.

It is again a renewal in the sense that it's the same space that they've had.

It's just that we determined that some of the square footages were off.

and some of the floor plan markings were incorrect so we've updated all that with the new lease.

And it ups the square footage, the rate per square foot, a few dollars in each space and will result in a net gain to CAT of about $5,240 each year over and above the three leases we had.

Thanks.

Is there anybody?

Nobody sign up?

Okay.

Nobody for the public hearing.

Opening public hearing.

Closing it.

Any other comments, questions?

Why, yes.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any other questions, discussion?

All in favor?

Thank you very much for your hard work for the region and for our economy.

OK, next item is a public hearing and ordinance closing Unaccepted Street off Douglas Avenue.

This is the first of two readings.

We've allocated 10 minutes to this item on our agenda.

Mr. Mayor, Members of Council, this is a proposed ordinance

resulting from a petition to close in Streeter Alley between two adjoining properties on Douglas Avenue in the Belmont area of the city.

The alley has been there, we believe, since it was originally planted in 1906 as a private alley which could be closed by the properties abutting each side of the alley in order to ensure clear title to the property

The adjoining owners have petitioned the city for an ordinance which would close, vacate, and discontinue this portion of the right-of-way.

It is scheduled for a public hearing.

There are three criteria the council considers when given this type of request.

They are on the top of page two of your agenda memo.

Okay, any questions for Mr. Brown?

There were no public hearing on this one as well.

I'm opening that public hearing.

I don't see anybody having signed up.

Anybody wish to speak during this on this matter?

Going once.

Okay, closing the public hearing.

Is there any other discussion questions?

I do have a question, Mayor Signer.

By approving this resolution, we are not making any statement that universally closes alleys.

This is not a policy position.

No, that's correct.

Each of these types of requests are considered on their own merits.

We do have a written city policy that governs requests to close streets or alleys.

Sometimes the application of that policy results in a recommendation to close the alley, sometimes it doesn't.

Sometimes there's a recommendation to close it with conditions.

Any others?

Okay, is there a motion to approve?

So moved.

No?

All right.

All in favor?

Mr. Mayor, it's the first of two readings.

Oh, I'm sorry.

It's the first of two readings.

My apologies.

We just needed a first and a second.

That was the ordinance, first reading.

So that goes forward.

Next item, Resolution Aqua Car Wash. We have allocated 20 minutes to this item.

Good evening, Councillors.

I'm here tonight to present to you a special use permit for a manual car wash at the property located at 1300 Emmett Street.

Jeff and Ginger Camrath of Aqua VA LLC is requesting a special use permit in conjunction with a preliminary site plan to allow the establishment and operation of a manual car wash

Identified on City Real Property Tax Map 40 and Parcel 4F.

The property has frontage on Emmett Street North and access to Meadowbrook Road and contains approximately 0.719 acres.

The applicant proposes to replace the existing building, which is the former subway and before that pizza hut, with a 1105 square foot office and sales building fronting on Emmett Street North, an outdoor landscape seating area, and a canopied wash vacuum area and canopied detail area to the rear of the proposed building.

The applicant proposes a rainwater cistern on site that will capture rainwater from the proposed building's roof.

This water will be stored and reused for the water necessary for car washes.

This application went before the City Council and Planning Commission on May 10, 2016 for a joint public hearing.

The following topics of discussion that the Commission focused on were the neighborhood's concerns of traffic and the traffic flow, the site's access to Meadowbrook Road and its impact to the neighborhood, appropriate hours of operation for proposed use, and the noise impact and potential ways to mitigate noise.

Going before you tonight is a resolution with the proposed eight conditions.

I want to go ahead and read them.

I think it's important to put on record.

So number one, the special use, and before I read them, I wanted to say these are in hopes to mitigate some of the impacts as well as comply with some of the comprehensive plans, visions, and goals of making a commercial site both auto and pedestrian friendly.

So number one, the special use approved is a manual car wash, a facility where cleaning is performed by employees of the facility.

If the property owner wishes to establish or operate an automatic car wash or a self-service car wash, those types of car washes are not covered by this permit.

Number two, access to Meadowbrook Road from the subject property shall be closed off during hours when the car wash is not open to the public.

Number three, signage shall be placed interior to the site directing the drivers of motor vehicles exiting the rear of the site to turn left onto Meadowbrook Road and proceed to Morton Drive in order to access Emmett Street North.

This will help mitigate any potential increase in traffic through the Meadowbrook Hills-Rugby neighborhood.

The location type and orientation of the signage shall be reviewed and approved by the traffic engineer.

In addition to the interior signage, some type of physical improvement, for example,

a concrete pork chop shall be installed to inhibit the ability of motor vehicles to make a right turn onto Meadowbrook Road when exiting the subject property.

The nature and dimensions of the physical improvement shall be determined by the city's traffic engineer as part of the final site plan approval.

Number four, bicycle storage facilities will be provided on site, the number and type to be reviewed and approved by the bicycle and pedestrian coordinator.

Number five, the owner of the subject property shall provide a connection to the proposed Meadowbrook Road sidewalk trail project, Barracks Road to Morton Drive, and a location determined in consultation with city staff.

Number six, the special use shall comply with the following requirements in addition to the requirements of the city's outdoor lighting regulations.

A vertical shield shall be placed on each light fixture installed adjacent to low density residential properties.

The final site plan shall identify the location of each light fixture subject to this requirement and shall identify the type of fixture and shield that will be used to comply with this condition.

No exterior speakers shall be utilized in the operation of the special use.

And finally, the hours of operation for special use shall be limited to the period from 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. each day.

So at the joint public hearing the Commission took the following action and recommended approval of the SUP 5 to 1 and tonight you have several alternatives.

You can make a motion and take action to approve the attached resolution grading an SUP as recommended by the Planning Commission.

You can by motion request changes to the attached resolution and then approve the SUP.

By motion defer the action on the SUP or by motion deny the request to SUP.

Questions?

And we would like to go ahead and get a presentation from the applicant as well.

Maybe on my, it's about backing up on Emmett Street.

Would you address that or would the applicant address that?

I heard something about we hope we can mitigate the effects of this business.

What steps do you plan to take to prevent backups?

I mean, you hope this thing is booming.

Yeah, he can probably address it some within their presentation, but there's

I'm wondering if we might

Are there any other questions for staff alone, because we might want to wait to have a presentation for them.

Okay, how about if we all have you all do, and we have 20 minutes of the whole thing, so if you could keep your presentation around five, that would be great.

I don't have one presentation.

My name is Jeff Camarath.

I'm the owner of Aqua VA. My wife, Ginger Camarath, over there.

I'll just give a little bit of background just so we're not in the blind here.

My wife is from Northern Virginia.

I'm originally from Houston, Texas, attended UVA, played baseball here, unfortunate day yesterday.

But we recently moved back in August.

And my family before me have an entrepreneurial spirit.

And this business doesn't come out of the blue.

My brother in Houston has two successful car washes in Houston.

So a lot of the concept, plan, and layout

And function is taken from his facility.

So we have a lot of insights going forward.

It's not just something we're just envisioning out of our heads.

So in terms of the queue, I can answer that here in a second, so I'll show you.

The first thing I'll show you all is the new proposed.

This is not an accepted site plan yet.

This is something we've posed based on the neighborhood concerns around traffic backing up.

And there's some issues around the sewer.

But ultimately, you guys can see here very well.

This is Image Street.

This is Meadowbrook on the back side.

This is the sales building, which is an 1,100 square foot building, which is a smaller footprint by about two-thirds.

The original building is about 3,000 square feet, so we're going to minimize the footprint.

The cars, as we're currently proposing the new site plan, is to pull in off of Emmett Street, drive in alongside the sales building, which will have queue for 10 cars going back towards Emmett.

We've also built a drive lane that's 20 feet wide, and there's parallel parking along the side for the queuing issue.

The reason is, if it were to get so busy, which has never happened, and Houston is a more populous city than Charlottesville, we've never had an issue where that backup happened that far.

It's the same length in Houston.

We could roll into the side here or use the parking spaces appropriately.

We also have bike storage plan and a water cistern towards helping the pedestrian impact biking lanes or biking workers potentially and the water cistern management will help to mitigate our use on the pull on the water demand.

This is our wash area here.

It consists of a cantilever canopy where you would do vacuums in front and then wash it towards the back.

We would actually capture all the water used, clean it before it actually goes through to the system itself, to the sewer system.

You would then exit one of two ways.

We've actually, thanks to all of our neighborhood feedback, we think we have a better site plan now where people can now exit.

And I've done the turn in my 4Runner, which is an SUV.

You can make the U-turn now, because we've pushed this as far down as possible.

You can make a turn and go back out to Emmett, if so desired.

Or you can continue the Meadowbrook Inn, where you can get a detail.

or exit that way.

And again, we've also added a pork chop, which is on city property.

We'd have to get permission to use city property to do that.

But we would build a pork chop.

We'd fund it ourselves to drive all the traffic left.

And going back towards the issue around backup, in Houston,

about the exact same dimensions on runway, never had backup into, and they have two streets that are in an intersection and never had a backup in the intersection, and again, they use a similar function with like a, it's not a third lane, but it's space there, and they help parking as well, and they use that.

The nice thing about our business is because we have two lanes, we can be washing multiple cars and vacuuming multiple cars at a time and move them out quickly.

So unlike the automated washes where you're kind of stacked and you can only go one through at a time, we can be working on multiple cars at a time.

So whether they're in the vacuum stage, they're in the cleaning stage, they're in the drying stage, they're all moving through quickly.

That's the whole design of the business.

I have some renderings so you can see what it looks like.

I think that tells part of the story really well.

This is the view, this is the older view from Emmett where the canopy's on the other side, so you can just imagine the canopy on the other side.

Everything else is the same.

We're gonna build a beautiful building on site with, you know, colonial inspirations, farmhouse inspirations, with the rainwater's gonna be captured off the roof, the cistern will be around the side of the building, so it's not allowed to be in front, but we're gonna capture about 2,000 to 3,500 gallon cistern, which can do, you know, as much rain as would fall on the roof, we'll be able to capture.

You would drive through the property, you'd get out of your car, we'd service it, you'd enter the building, and I'll show you the other back view.

Which from the back, this is looking back towards Emmett Street, you'd have an outdoor patio, which is going to be really nice.

We would have a little playground there, it would be enclosed.

You know, parents with children that want to come and serve, so we don't have to worry about them running out into traffic.

It's a very big concern.

We have a two-year-old at home.

We expect him to be on property at times, so we want to make sure he's safe as well.

This would be some kind of open, kind of dual space, indoor and outdoor.

Again, no outdoor speakers, but we would have some flow on really nice days and allow for just a great experience inside.

And that is a short presentation.

Thank you, and then we can do questions either.

Is there anybody else we need to hear from right now?

Mr. Fenwick was first, sorry.

I'll just make a comment.

I hope it's successful.

Thank you very much.

In my time on council, there have been two times when the projects that have come before me

The residents, the neighbors have said the owner did what he was supposed to do or she was supposed to do as far as notifying them, working with them.

So your business was one of them.

I appreciate that.

You know what their concerns are on that road back there, so I would encourage you to continue that cooperation with the neighbors.

Thank you, and if I could reply.

It is our belief as residents we've moved back here for a purpose.

We wanted to live here in the city and we also want to start a business here.

That business involves the community.

That business, I mean, those are going to be our customers the entire time and we want to service them, not just when they're on site purchasing a car wash from us, but in communication throughout any issues that might arise.

It is so imperative to me that they're happy

I know I'm not going to please everybody, but I'm going to work as hard as I can.

I'm the owner.

I'm going to be on site every day, or my wife will be on site every day.

If there is an issue, they can come talk to us.

I don't know how much of a lady I am at all.

We had a concern that was written to us

about employee parking.

Full-time 8 to 10 employees, excuse me, 8 to 12 employees.

On a super busy day you could flex into another

up to 8 or 10.

Part of the reasoning about putting bicycle parking in is we would have space if people rode their bikes.

Obviously they're not getting car washes, they're riding their bikes, they would be employees.

I myself ride a bike as well, so I could be one of those.

We also have a good relationship with the people next door in the office building space.

The busiest days are going to be weekends.

That's just natural.

All of our numbers from our sister site show that.

And I'll go back to this.

The average car wash run through per day is just 125 vehicles per day.

The max was 300.

Obviously, we'd like to do as much as possible.

But at the same time, we won't be building too much more traffic.

And hopefully, with that, on the weekends, we will work out

I wouldn't allow that.

I don't even know what the parking situation is on Meadowbrook.

I actually have not seen any no parking signs, but I wouldn't allow that in general.

So, great presentation.

In regards to some of the comments and concerns that we heard from people within the neighborhood,

I have two questions.

The first one, do you plan on having any other community meetings with the individuals in the neighborhood to provide them with the new plan and also adhere to any of their concerns or address them in any shape, form, or fashion?

That's the first question.

And then the second one, specifically to some of the concerns that we heard tonight during the public comment section.

Same things that we've been receiving from different members of that community.

in regards to or excuse me via email about what may be about to transpire.

How do you plan on mitigating that or kind of again finding the middle row or middle ground to ensure that both sides are happy?

So I can answer both of those.

And if I miss something, just let me know.

So the first thing we've done is when we're proposing, and this is just last week, we went to NDS to look at this new design.

All the changes were driven by the community with the ability to turn around and exit back onto Image Street.

That's a big one.

The pork chop or whatever

That section of road is only 185 feet going between our property and Morton and that's where we want to drive traffic according to everybody's consensus if people were to exit that way.

You know, work with City Counts, excuse me, the NDS to build whatever barrier is required.

We obviously support it if it happened to be on city property.

In terms of noise, things like that, we've done all the readings on the vacuum cleaners, which is the loudest piece of the property.

And we're in within all kinds of compliance.

They're not very loud.

It's in a couple of emails that were sent in.

I know I'm missing something here.

How do we work with him?

So the plan is I believe Heather will go public, correct or no?

These plans, if we were to approve them, they would be public record.

I'd be happy to have an email list.

I can talk with Ms. Imwe about sharing that and kind of working with them.

I know that Heather gets a lot of emails as well about kind of some of the feedback, and that gets directed right towards us and our site engineer, Alan Franklin.

So we are continually, continually working to make the best situation possible.

Now, I do want to say that

Because this is an SUP, there are a lot of businesses that are by right on that land.

And you were at the last meeting where the broker, the owner's broker, who we're leasing from, was explaining the businesses that were in line.

There's a Zaxby's, there was a Sonic, there was a vapor shop and tattoo parlor.

The two businesses, especially around the restaurant business, are going to drive more traffic.

That's just what they do.

Especially Zach's piece.

Right.

And what we want to do is we're going to limit that.

We don't want to close off that back road.

The other reason you can't really close off the road, in my opinion, is it's two pieces of property.

And so the owners, I don't have the right to speak for the owners to that.

So from that segment, we think our business is one of the best opportunities to limit traffic to that road.

Would you be open to having maybe another meeting with the Neighborhood Association to go over your plans as well as hear any other concerns and see if you all can find even more of a middle ground?

I think you've done a great job

of trying to adhere to their concerns thus far, but just based on what we've heard tonight in the emails.

This week they may not have seen your new plans, but...

They have not.

I'd be happy to.

Are there any other public ones for them to come to for any site planning?

So we could do another one.

I just want to make sure there wasn't one on the books.

Mayor Signer, I don't have questions.

Well, we're ready for a motion.

I'll make a motion.

We could deliberate.

Street.

I think as a car wash this is very thoughtfully done but however in order for me to make a decision I have to follow the standard of review that's in our city code and when I do that I have several criteria and I'll just go down them.

So the first criteria, will it be harmonious with existing patterns of use and development in the neighborhood?

Yes, it will be harmonious with the existing pattern of the drive-throughs and the fast food, but is that the pattern we want here?

That is now not how I read the comprehensive plan for the last 16 years, nor is it in sync with the purpose of the urban corridor zoning district.

Second, will it substantially conform to the city's comp plan?

I really don't see that it does.

First, going back to the Tori Galles report in 2000 that gave rise to our 2003 mixed-use corridor zoning, the infill development along Emmett would help transform the corridor from a highway-oriented artery characterized by low-density standalone uses and strip centers to a boulevard of a more urban character.

The report also said the greatest opportunity in the corridor was to develop

Office Tech and LabRD space targeting users that demand and desire proximity to UVA.

The 2001 comp plan stated that any development along Emmet must be sensitive to the residential uses in Venable and should be adequately buffered.

So we are hearing calls repeatedly from our housing and startup space daily, yet our zoning seems to allow low density car oriented development, be it a car wash in this location or a CVS with a drive through at the Barracks Road intersection.

Is this the vision for the northern gateway of the city of Charlottesville?

We also heard concerns about the adjacent neighborhood, about decanting cars into the neighborhood street.

Although I am not in favor of closing access to public streets, such as Meadow Creek Road, we must be sensitive to the impacts that a high car volume use will have.

That said, another by right use, I'm not sure whether or not it would have generated more traffic.

But a broader vision of this corridor might have also included the use of an alley, perhaps parallel to Emmett,

that would have connected the parcel in question to Morton Drive.

So second, it is not in keeping with the latest 2013 compliant vision for urban design and entrance corridors.

That vision specifically states to facilitate the development of nodes of density and vitality in the city's mixed-use corridors.

Entrance corridors in particular are to emphasize placemaking and ensure that new development, including franchises, complements the city's character and respect those qualities that distinguish the city's built environment.

Do we want people to see and feel a discernible difference when they cross the city line along US 29?

The character of the street itself should signal that you've arrived someplace distinctive.

So the fourth criteria of the standard of a route review that we must follow, will it have adverse impacts?

There will be traffic on Meadow Creek.

Discourages economic development?

My concern is yes, that it is.

It's underutilizing actually valuable urban land.

Massing and Scale, it's more auto-centric than the original fast food Pizza Hut and Subway.

Fifth criteria, does it conform with the zoning district?

According to the objectives of the mixed-use corridor districts, of particular importance is the creation of corridors that serve as vital centers for economic growth and development, while at the same time encouraging development that is friendly to pedestrians and alternate modes of transportation characteristic of an urban setting.

I really don't see how a car wash does that.

and this is why.

I mean, a drive-thru and a car wash create more conflict points with pedestrians, not less, and therefore won't create a dynamic street life or de-emphasize parking facilities.

It is a parking facility.

It's a parking lot.

It's not mixed use.

It's even smaller than the original fast food establishment.

1,100 versus 2,600 servicing cars, not people.

Again, if it's

If our existing zoning regulations drive us away from the longstanding vision for our mixed use and entrance corridors, then that zoning must be revised.

That's why council directed staff to conduct a code audit two years ago.

In the meantime, we contort ourselves trying to justify applications that fall short of the vision we have of ourselves because our development rules don't support the vision.

So it doesn't

follow the streets that work.

We haven't adopted the streets that work, but the streets that work calls this Emmett Street a mixed use type A.

It doesn't follow the design standards for that type of street.

So I, I would not, I cannot support the project, this SUP because in my view, it doesn't bring the plan of development for the Emmett Street urban corridor into conformity with the purposes and standards of the comp plan or the intent of the mixed use corridor district.

The application, in my view, clearly illustrates how there is incoherence between our zoning regulations and practice and the stated intent and objectives our zoning ordinances in the comprehensive plan and theory.

And such incoherence is unsustainable over time.

We must put that code audit on the front burner.

So thank you for letting me read that, but I really do believe we're not following our vision.

I have a question for Ms. Galvin.

Thank you for that response.

This is to a certain degree a area of expertise, and we're inclined to follow along with your reasoning.

You provided very detailed reasons in regards to why you cannot support or have ourself one question in regards to the presenter's point, which I personally believe was well made.

If we do not get the car wash, and if you were to have something, for example, the Zaxby's or another restaurant,

And do you mind if I add another question on your, just tacking on another, so I guess the question is,

So the gap between the goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the uses that are permissible by rights, can you explain your thinking or the critical thinking that

As an SUP, it is something that's discretionary, so you don't have to pass an SUP.

This is a very car-centric, auto-centric use.

What this is telling me, as I've looked into this, is our zoning is terribly, terribly out of whack with our comprehensive plan vision.

Either we changed that vision that was compiled over 16 years, or we changed the zoning.

In this particular case,

I'm making a point, I'm making a statement.

I cannot continue to approve uses along that corridor that has been determined by our community for decades to be a mixed-use, vibrant, pedestrian, bike-oriented corridor.

Providing bike facilities to a car wash doesn't, people don't drive, ride their bikes to a car wash.

It's not

It's incoherent.

So the idea that the water is being collected in the cistern is wonderful sustainability.

But in this particular location, this really, it really should be a different kind of use that draws upon the neighborhood.

So the by right zoning could be pushed so that people build out more of the site, that there's more discretion.

Maybe they need to review those land uses.

But if our zoning is allowing this to happen and everyone's telling us, well then,

If it's not this, it's even going to be worse.

Might I respond to a couple of comments?

Yes, please.

Number one, we don't envision customers biking.

We were asked to put a bike facility on there, and we complied with that.

So it wasn't that we were just out of touch.

And in terms of the, sorry, I wouldn't say this,

I lost my train of thought for a second.

You'll have to forgive me.

You don't come back.

I don't take it out on you.

It was bike facilities, but it was...

It happens.

I do recall what it was.

So the reason the building is 1,100 square feet is because that is literally the only place you could put a new building on the site.

the floodplains that exist there.

There's a box culvert that runs under.

It's a branch of Meadow Creek that runs on the facility.

It runs under the existing building.

If you wanted to repair that box culvert, you'd have to demo that entire building.

We've moved that off and out of an easement.

There's a sewer line on the north side of the property.

We tried to put the building on the north side of the property.

If there's a sewer line there, you can't put a building on the north side of the property because it was, as mentioned earlier, an old street.

So it's a very tight piece of property, one that

We believe our business can fit, and I've thought about this a lot, Ms. Galvin, and I don't know many other businesses that could do the size of buildings, given that the Pizza Hut and the subway were both larger buildings, that they could put one on there, supply the parking, the flow back and forth, given that the current building already sits over the box culvert.

So we've done the flood reviews, flood plain studies to do that, and that's why the building sits where it does, and that's why we condensed that size, and I think that

would be of concern going forward if any buyer right is going to have an issue.

Just if it's going to be housing, I just don't see how the footprint could be it.

There are other buyer right uses, as noted.

So that's the reasoning behind why we think this piece of property

I have a question following on all this.

And Ms. Neumeier or anybody else from staff could address this.

What would it take for the city government to accomplish what Ms. Galvin is talking about, which is for the zoning code to meet, to match, and be overhauled and updated to reflect the goals of the comprehensive plan so that we wouldn't be faced.

And this is the second time this has come up.

And this is the code audit.

So that would have to be an initiation of a zoning text amendment.

So we would staff a present to Planning Commission or City Council.

And the timeline, I think, I'm not quite sure what code delineates as the exact timeline, but it does take.

a few months to review and then come back and present to you.

Okay, and can you speak any further to what the applicant's response was just there, is that there are particular details about the physical realities of the site that would make it, even if the comprehensive plan were fully

The site itself is a difficult period to put something on there because you've got the floodplain in the back restricting you from

putting building on it, and then at the front you've got two competing easements, one from RWSA and then another that the city, I believe, the city maintains for the box culvert, so your building envelope becomes smaller.

As for mixed use, better or more desired mixed uses, you know, that's hard to say.

I think building anything at this point on that site is difficult, but

If City Council wants to address that in a zoning text amendment, that could be looked into as for the uses that would be more appropriate to that site.

Does anybody else have, who hasn't spoken a lot, I just want to make sure.

Not so much a question, just comment.

Just because the part of your question Mayor Signer was about the code audit because two and a half years ago or so we did initiate and direct staff to work on a code audit and that was supposed to come after we've completed the streets that work and that was the other part of Mayor Signer's question.

When are we going to be moving forward on the code audit so that we assess this situation before we do any text amendments?

I can't give you a 100% answer, but next week actually playing commission, the Streets That Work Plan moves forward.

So once that is finalized, I think staff is hoping for direction as to how we move forward.

But that would be pretty much as soon as possible.

We'll get moving on the code audit.

I just want to remind everyone we're running.

It's been a long time on this one, but yes.

OK.

I get what you're trying to say about more appropriate mixed uses and I do agree that there are some buy right uses that are potentially inappropriate that that needs to be looked at.

Having said that, I think that there is a balance and I think that

In terms of this site, while it's an auto dependent use, it's manual so it's lesser impact and I think that by working with the applicant we have made some strides in trying to make this more pedestrian friendly.

and trying to promote the employees to bike to the site.

Kristin Szakos is working on the properties along that road to build that pedestrian connection along Meadowbrook Road, which currently doesn't exist.

That's the highest priority in the local street.

parameter chart, you know, and there's a potential connection there that the applicant's willing to put in.

I think there's definitely a balance.

I think that, as well as that, you've got, when you're thinking about mixed use, the reality of it is, is on 29, that's probably the most trafficked corridor you've got, so there are gonna be cars there, and I think it's staff's opinion that this is an appropriate use, and I think with the balancing,

Can I, yes, well, okay, so I make a motion for five more minutes.

Okay, and can I, is there, is anyone comfortable signaling how they're feeling about this?

Well, I made a motion, but generally when you make a motion, you get minutes to explain why.

Of course, of course, yes.

Although I won't take the whole five.

And really with due deference to Council Galvin,

This is her area of expertise and I really appreciate it and I was listening to what you were saying and hadn't realized you were going to do that and so I was really trying to kind of work that into how I felt about this.

I think while I agree in principle and I think it's important sometimes to stand on principle which I think is what you were saying this sort of is that in this particular case on this particular site this may not be our best place or at least it's not for me the best place to make that stand

partly because of the physical limitations that were discussed during the public hearing and also again tonight and trying to be a realist and looking at what's possible and frankly having neighbors who live right behind it who I know and love and I want to make sure although they don't approve this or don't support this and I do it's largely because of the neighborhood behind it so

I was just going to say that the concern about Meadowbrook Heights and the traffic has been for me very compelling and I suggested at the public hearing and it's now in the conditions and I really appreciate that an actual concrete

I think it is a public street and although it has been so lightly trafficked

over the years that right now people can walk and play ball and kind of be out in the street.

None of us has a guarantee of a public street being that pedestrian friendly, although we are committed to pedestrian friendliness.

And that's why I think it's also really important that this includes a sidewalk, a sidewalk that that neighborhood really needs.

And I think that that's a plus.

So that said, I strongly feel that this

Particular business, and I know the planning commission can't really consider this, but the council can.

Being a local business with the owner on site makes a huge difference, especially in the alternatives that we might have in this case.

And the business owner's commitment, which is codified in the SCP to install a chain or some sort of barrier to keep traffic from going through at night.

Now, traffic can go through.

I understand there are people occasionally sleeping on this lot and urinating in this lot and throwing garbage in this lot.

So I think it will be an improvement over the present conditions for the lot and I think that adding, and in my motion I did not mention, but I would like to add a guaranteed employee parking on site or in an approved location that's not in the neighborhood.

I recognize that this property is in a business corridor and if this business is not successful there another business will certainly find it a good place to locate.

A restaurant or other business would be likely to generate far more traffic than this car wash and it wouldn't have to make any special accommodations for the neighborhood in terms of hours or left turn only signage or nighttime use or through traffic at night.

I'll cut to the chase.

I do support this project.

It's certainly better than what's there now.

It's certainly better than what could be there.

We have a young couple that come into our community and they're starting their business, they're risking their capital.

So I applaud what you're doing.

You bring in the jobs, and as I said before, it's unusual that you're working so well with the neighbors, and that to me is pretty critical.

And last of all, the Planning Commission approved this five to one, and I give the Planning Commission, as I do the Board of Architectural Review, great weight.

I'll say for about 30 seconds, I would associate myself with what Mr. Benwick said in many respects.

I have made one vote in the last month that was a sort of protest vote against code problems that we have.

That was when we overruled the BAR on an application we had to add an extensive

I'm very hesitant to make

this application a second sending a signal about that problem which we've already which we need urgently to move on so I'm gonna make a commitment here that I think this City Council should

really shift into higher gear on getting our government working on making our code, our zoning code matching the priorities in our comprehensive plan.

And I think that we're hearing that loud and clear here.

I think that the limitations of the site, the physical limitations and the fact that the status quo will undoubtedly, I think if it stays vacant because of the limitations, I don't think that it's great.

I've been there.

It's not, that's a bad scenario to just last.

And I think that another use that would probably come in

would be worse than this.

So I hear the protests in the neighborhood.

I know the inlays really well.

I know I heard the other protests and the concerns.

I am heartened that you all have taken a lot of those concerns into the new site plan.

I think that bringing that back to the neighborhood is

Really important.

I think that this is sincere, but if you all are just aiming to franchise this thing and have 100 of these and not be in the neighborhood, I would be more concerned.

I don't hear that.

But those are the reasons that I will support this.

Can you prohibit parking on public streets?

By the employees, yes sir.

Well, yes I do.

I just have a question for Ms. Galvin.

After hearing the comments from our colleagues as well as the commitment from the applicant

I sincerely appreciate your concern, Mr. Bellamy, and I really appreciate the efforts that the applicant has made to make this a very good car wash. And I can't call this a protest vote.

It's voting based on how I view my charge.

which is to review the code of review as per our city code.

And this is how I've done it.

This is a vote based on what I believe my responsibility is to this community.

So having said that, it does illustrate for me how serious our disconnect is, as Mary Signer said.

And I have now, this is my fifth year on council, and there have been times when I've thought this is the lesser of two evils or three evils.

It can't happen anymore.

I just can't agree anymore because this is not

It's not good policy.

That's why I believe this.

And it's the applicants are doing a wonderful job as far as they can within the box they're in.

My job is to run a tight meeting with time limits.

So I'm going to, unless there's a motion for more time, I'm going to call this vote.

Okay.

All in favor of the motion as amended by Mr. Fenwick, concluding that parking requirement.

Any motion?

Okay, carries three to two.

Okay, we are taking a break now.

Music playing

Music playing.

and John F. Kennedy

Music Playing

Music playing...

you

Fifeville

Music Playing

The End

I don't know what you're talking about.

The End

All right, we're coming back into session.

Item number five, resolution regarding the International School of Charlottesville, SUP, 209 Maury Avenue.

This is the first of one reading.

Yes, Matt Alfelli, City Planner, NDS.

Mayor, City Council, before you tonight is an application for an SUP permit to allow daycare and elementary school use of the subject property, 209 Maury Avenue and the three adjacent properties to the north.

The International School of Charlottesville, ISC, working with the applicant, Bill Atwood, plans to build an early childhood education campus on the subject property.

The subject properties are located at the intersection of Maury Avenue and Stadium Road.

The largest parcel fronts on Maury Avenue, having a single-family home built in 1910 and designed by Eugene Bradbury.

The additional lots front on Stadium Road and are undeveloped.

All lots are zoned R2U.

The proposed elementary school daycare is for approximately 132 students with 20 staff within 14 classrooms by the 2018-2019 school year.

Beyond this time frame, the school could expand by an additional 60 students in five classrooms.

This location is proposed to be the permanent home of the ISC and would allow for the consolidation of 830 Monticello Avenue and 750 Hinton Avenue campuses.

On April 20th, the applicant, along with the ISC, held a community meeting at the subject property and provided information to the JPA neighborhood regarding the development of the site.

On May 10th, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the SUP application.

The following areas of topic were discussed.

Traffic concerns during drop off and pick up activities for the proposed use of the overall in the overall traffic impact on the neighborhood.

Parking for staff and special events, preservation of the Eugene Baraberry designed home on the subject property and furthering the goals of the city's comprehensive plan, specifically land use goal number two, establishing a mix of uses within walking distance of residential neighborhoods that will enhance opportunities for small group interaction throughout Charlottesville.

and Historic Preservation and Urban Design goals five and nine respectively, protect and enhance the existing character, stability and scale of the city's older neighborhood and capture and embody the energy of existing buildings by encouraging the adaptive reuse of more or more efficient use of existing structures.

The Planning Commission voted seven to zero to recommend approval of the SCP with the following conditions.

One, an approved final site plan,

Related permits and approvals must be obtained for the subject property collectively prior to commitment of any new construction, alteration of existing buildings, and prior to any land disturbance activity.

A traffic impact study shall be completed and included with the submission of the proposed final site plan at a level of detail deemed adequate by the city traffic engineer.

Number two, a maximum of 150 children

Total combined school and daycare use may be served at the facilities located on the subject property.

An amendment to this SUP shall be required in advance of serving more than 150 children.

Three, the safety plan for the daycare and elementary school use must be submitted annually to the city's zoning administrator.

The safety plan, at minimum, must address the following.

Drop off and pick up location times and coordination activities on the site during peak traffic hours.

Trash recycling storage and removal plan, time and dates for planned events that would fall outside normal operation hours of a daycare and elementary school.

Four, all onsite parking shall be used exclusively for the childcare and educational purposes

proposed for the daycare and elementary school facility and related accessory uses.

The final site plan shall specify measures such as the use of gates or physical barriers to prevent on-site parking for or in connection with any other purposes, use or activities.

5.

The existing tree buffer, the existing trees buffering the subject property from Stadium Road and Maury Avenue shall be preserved and shall be protected from on-site construction activities.

An existing tree may be removed if a certified arborist provides a report stating the subject tree needs to be removed due to

Disease infestation or is a danger to the public?

Or B, the tree needs to be removed to accommodate a necessary curb cut on the stadium, road or Maury Avenue and establish a regular site distance for such entrance exits following a determination by the city traffic engineer that such a curb cut is necessary.

Or C, the tree needs to be removed to accommodate new pedestrian circulation facilities required by the city zoning regulations.

Six,

The final site plan shall demonstrate that S3 screening as described in section 34871 of the city code will be installed and maintained along the western and southern boundary of the subject property.

Seven, all outdoor lighting and light fixtures shall be full cut off luminaries and equipped with devices for reducing light such as shields, visors or hoods to eliminate the luminary glare and block direct light from site fixtures from spillover to neighboring properties.

Fixtures shall be recessed and shall completely conceal the light source from all viewing positions other than those on the site positions intended to receive illumination from the fixture.

Eight, playground equipment shall be installed per manufacturer specifications for so long as any playground equipment remains on the subject property.

It shall be maintained in accordance with manufacturer specifications.

Nine,

Special events not part of day-to-day operations of the educational and daycare facilities shall utilize off-street or valet parking to accommodate vehicles for which adequate parking is not available on site and tent.

Alterations and modifications of the existing building designed by Eugene Bradbury shall preserve the exterior feature and character of the existing building and shall be designed and performed in accordance with the Secretary of Interior's standard for historic preservation rehabilitation.

Alterations or removal of architectural significant interior features shall be photographically documented by the owner to the subject property in advance of such alterations or removal.

These photographs shall be offered to the University of Virginia's Eugene Bradbury Specials Collection Library.

Staff is available along with the applicant and members of the ISC to answer any questions.

Thank you.

Any questions?

Quick one.

So this is a special use permit.

So where is the special part of this?

Correct.

One of the things that I'm just looking at the map here and the satellite view and everything.

What's in the building right now?

And I know the stadium is right by there.

The University of Virginia is kind of all around it.

Correct.

And the neighborhood, all I've heard from neighbors is positive about this.

The majority of the feedback that we have received has been positive.

Other questions?

The applicant is here.

Would you all like a couple minutes to say anything, address any concerns involved?

Okay.

All right.

Sounds like we're ready.

Thank you.

Is there a motion to?

I'll also move.

Okay.

Any discussion, questions?

All in favor?

Motion carries five to zero.

Congratulations, good luck.

We are now moving on to the second, the next item in the agenda and we have had a little bit of, is Brian Haluska here?

There were a lot of council, various council questions about this one that happened in a flurry of emails last week and over the weekend and this week and I understood this morning at 10 o'clock that staff was thinking of asking that this be pulled from the agenda

because they needed time to get all the answers so we would have them in time to be able to consider them before we actually went ahead and did this.

and so at two o'clock I received an email as we all did saying that this item was being pulled from the agenda and then I stopped preparing for it so I had read it five days ago and you know looked at it preliminarily but on the day of the council meeting I always go through very thoroughly and kind of get the questions I might have and all that kind of stuff I did not get a chance to do that today because I thought it was off the agenda and we got it and to their credit staff was able to get the answers today after all

And I think this is an accurate description of the events today about this one agenda item.

and we all we have a grave concern about delaying for applicants things especially when we have a new there's you know new code changes in place for this corridor so we want to move expeditiously but today we we only got word

And some of us didn't get it then.

Mr. Saip, you're in town, so it's not, we hate to inconvenience you, but you can come back.

Is there any concern about delaying for two weeks?

My name is Maynard Sipe.

I'm a land use attorney here in town.

You all have seen me before with the firm of Boyden Sipe, and I represent the client in this matter, the applicant.

And the only thing I want to say is I didn't know anything.

I mean, I had been made aware at the end of the day on Friday that there had been some questions asked.

and no one had come to us with the questions, particularly Brian mentioned it to me on Friday.

But I wasn't certain what questions were really specifically being looked for, what information was being looked for.

And then today I did not know this might be deferred until 10 a.m. or after that when I received the message like an hour later.

And so we did not know, we got the message around two that it was back on the agenda.

I think it is safe to say that the biggest concern

has to deal with the changes in the parking ratios in light of the fact that we do not want to see any spillover parking in the neighborhood streets that are adjacent to West Main.

That's Fifeville and 10th and Page.

And we do not want any on-street parking on West Main Street.

That is our big, big concern.

And so that's why we were asking lots of questions.

And the other thing that was, it was not clear based on what we had gotten from the Planning Commission,

what was the definition of a micro unit?

The way the Planning Commission's conditions came across was that it had to at least be 450 square feet.

So that meant that a micro unit could be 1,200 square feet, 1,500 square feet.

There was some very strange language that was given to us that we felt really needed to be clarified.

And so we're proposing to define that micro unit

It is no bigger than 450 square feet, not minimum 450 square feet.

That's the kind of thing that when you look at the research, that's how it's defined.

And I think what we need to do is just give them the... Yeah, I'm going to, because we're, we have, we have a majority who's not prepared even enough for this discussion.

So I think we should, let's just, let's just wait to another meeting.

We have the materials prepared.

I'm sorry for your inconvenience.

You are, you're local though.

okay so you all had a nice trip down to City Hall you got a validation so all right so we will we will just put this on another agenda and we'll use all the materials for today well I think so I'm not gonna be here but well we need to commit to that though because okay

Okay.

Alright, we'll figure it out and you'll know tomorrow or the next day.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right, last item on the agenda, resolution number seven, resolution regarding sidewalk waiver request for 1501 Rugby Road.

Heather Neumeier presenting again.

Good evening again.

The item before you tonight

The item before you tonight is the sidewalk waiver request at 1501 Rugby Road.

The applicant, Mr. John Fouts, is requesting a sidewalk waiver for the property where there is a single-family home recently built.

Section 34-1124B of the zoning ordinance requires that when a single-family home is dwelled that the sidewalk improvements, which include sidewalk curb and gutter, shall be constructed within the public right-of-way dedicated along the adjacent public street for that purpose.

It also gives the option to either apply for a sidewalk waiver or contribute to the sidewalk fund where the cost reads, the owner of the lot or parcel at the owner's sole option elects to contribute funds to a sidewalk improvement fund in an amount equivalent to the cost of dedication of land for and construction of the required sidewalk, curb and gutter.

The applicant included the following justifications for the waiver application.

The applicant wants to put the lot wherever possible back into its natural habitat which affords privacy.

Sidewalks would require destruction and or removal of the existing vegetation including several mature trees to the detriment of the streetscape.

There are no sidewalks in the vicinity of the parcel to which a constructed sidewalk could connect.

Sidewalk curbs would inhibit current sheet flow of water off the intersection where it is now absorbed by the property and instead concentrate it into discharge on adjacent properties.

And grays are inhospitable and would require undesirable grading along a portion of the property.

Staff evaluates the sidewalk waiver request based on factors which include whether any engineering challenges that exist that would require an undue financial burden on the applicant, as well as we have the bicycle and pedestrian coordinator comment on these requests.

There was no input specific to this waiver request, but we have heard recently expressed interest from the Meadowbrook Hills Rugby Neighborhood for construction of a sidewalk along Rugby Road.

It is also included as a future connection to the bicycle pedestrian plan.

Quickly I'll go through the staff's findings.

Current contours along the subject property show the flow moving parallel to the road surfaces.

This in conjunction with the property being on the high side of the roadway will not impede the sheet flow of water more than it currently does.

The current grades along this property are not excessive when compared to conditions in Charlottesville.

Based off of the EPR engineering study completed in 2015, that concluded the east side of Rugby Road, which is the opposite side of the project site, is the preferred site for future sidewalk connection.

There would be no anticipated future connection to a sidewalk built at the project site at 1501 Rugby.

Contributions made into the Sidewalk Fund assist in sidewalk construction citywide which helps improve connectivity throughout the city and engineering staff has reviewed the subject parcel and has provided a cost estimate based off of road frontage of the specific site and unit pricing at a total of $17,855.19.

I would like to note that this estimate does not take into account costs associated with the mobilization, permit fees, traffic control, or other common costs.

For example, costs of a result of conditions specific to the site, like drainage improvements.

This calculation was developed by engineering staff as a standardized way to calculate contribution amount from an owner opting to contribute to the sidewalk fund based off unit pricing and the frontage of the subject property.

A couple questions for you, I'm sure everyone else does as well.

Can you, this is a fairly new program, can you give background on just generally on how many times a year this is happening, what the general amounts are that someone is asked to pay in when they're doing the waiver?

I don't have a specific amount for you.

I know Kerry Rainey brought one recently.

It is a fairly new program.

I'm not meaning to hide the ball.

It's a corner lot, so you've got greater amount of frontage.

What staff is trying to do is create a standardized way to estimate the cost of this and I guess when I mentioned this is what this cost does not include, that includes things specific to the site like the grading that would be only to that site having said that.

There's any range of data that could tell us whether this amount is on the margin of $17,000, given that it's a relatively new program.

You can introduce yourself too, I'm sorry.

My name is Alexander Ikef and I'm the NDS director.

Our engineers, they have a way of calculating that.

They take the linear footage of the frontage of the property and then they look at other variables, you know, like the rugged nature of the area where that is going to require retaining walls and things like that.

So they take that into consideration and they use

between $100 to $125 per linear foot in terms of the multiplication.

I have a question for our attorney, but I also have a very short statement to ask the question of our attorney and maybe also of Mr. Kefuna.

So I feel like tonight we only are given two choices.

That we either have to force the false family to construct a $17,000 sidewalk that's going to tear down trees and other greenery and create an expansive sidewalk, extensive sidewalk that almost nobody's going to use because it's on the wrong side of the street or to pay $17,000 into the city sidewalk fund.

And the only other choice we have is to grant them a waiver where they don't have to do either one.

So we get no money for the sidewalk fund and there's no sidewalk putting there.

put in their property and I find myself wanting a third choice and the property line in this case is way longer than we usually deal with and you know just in the waivers and things like that and so $17,000 is a huge amount of money and I do understand why the falses are reluctant to add a $17,000 cost to what's essentially their retirement downsizing so I'd like to at

instead suggest, and ask if we're allowed to suggest, that we deny the waiver and instead grant a partial discount for the in lieu payment and accept a sidewalk contribution of $10,000 instead, which could probably build that amount of sidewalk somewhere else in the city, so it would be a reasonable trade.

And that way we get much-needed sidewalk infrastructure in the city, and the falses don't have to build a sidewalk to nowhere.

No.

And let me explain why.

The option of contributing to the sidewalk fund rests with the owner.

granted by the General Assembly.

It actually amended our authority.

We previously had the authority to require this in subdivisions.

The 2015 legislation authorized it to be applied in our zoning ordinance, which is how this has come to you.

And the state code provision

which authorizes this gives the property owner the option of contributing to a sidewalk fund maintained and administered by the city funds equivalent to the cost of the dedication of land for and construction of a sidewalk on the property.

So I think while I can certainly understand the request given the magnitude of the amount of money in this case

I don't think it's supported by the enabling legislation.

I also think as a practical matter it introduces an element of uncertainty to the process because this is supposed to be an option for the property owner and if they exercise that option they don't have to come to council.

But if we have a process whereby

The amount can be negotiated or discounted, then it basically has to come to council in every situation.

Now, and I'm not suggesting this is an appropriate resolution here, but you can waive it in part and require it, the construction of the sidewalk in part if you think it is warranted on one stretch of the frontage but not the other.

We, as you might have guessed, name for nothing.

My name is John Faults.

A little background.

I'm going to pass something.

You've got a very good packet from the staff.

I was pleased.

These are just some other photos.

Oh, one of our house, which I just think is a better picture of the house, but there's another picture of a photo of a house on Blue Ridge, 1421, which did not build a sidewalk and did not pay into the fund.

They got a waiver from city council.

So just to let you know that there is a precedent in our neighborhood for granting a waiver.

I don't think anybody wants a sidewalk here.

At least staff, I think, very fairly said, hey, it's not going to connect anything.

It would interrupt some of the water flow.

We tried to put in a curb 12 years ago, because the water runs onto our property next door.

And Gary O'Connell said, no, you can't do that.

It would change the way the water flows.

And they didn't want us to do it.

It is important.

Well, that's just speaking that, no, we don't want to sidewalk.

And I don't think anybody in the city wants it.

I hear the way you're thinking.

The notice that we got from the city speaks to construction.

This is on the building permits, very small.

But what it says is something very interesting.

Let me get it.

It says

All engineering acquires satisfied including but not limited to the city standard sidewalk and curbing installed along the width of the front of the lot.

And that's the only thing that we got received when we got the building permit.

The front of the lot is a long, rugby route.

It's less than half, in fact we had to move boundary lines so that we would front on Rugby Road.

But it's less than half the total, 300 feet, I think 297 or something like that, that cities stand.

I will ask you for a full waiver.

If you

suggest the half waiver, half fee, then I think that we'd want to come back and talk to you or talk to staff.

Thank you.

I just want to, if you don't mind, I just want to clarify something before the reference that Mr. Falls made in terms of the other waiver.

the City Council granted before.

When that particular property was developed, I don't think the sidewalk fund was established.

So as a matter of fact, this particular application is the second sidewalk fund we are dealing with in terms of the payment into the sidewalk fund.

and granted that fact, I just want Council to have that information before you start deliberating.

Okay.

I think it's 300.

I'm not sure what age.

I think it's 300 linear fees.

I don't think so.

I understand it.

I understand that.

I can't speak to what's stated on the permit but the code references the adjacent public street and it's been interpreted in the past that if you're on a corner lot you have to address sidewalk on both public rights-of-way.